About Me

In the name of Allah (God),
I have decided to dedicate sincere and honest endeavour in helping to establish the Truth by helping to defend the good name of the last Prophet (pbuh) of Allah as well as refuting many other lies and misconceptions that are being disseminated by the insincere, wicked, deceptive, intellectually and morally bankrupted individuals as well as the ignorant individuals who all share a faulty characteristic; a blatant disregard for the Truth.
I ask Allah to purify my intentions and save me from doing any good action for self-aggrandizement, as all actions are judged by intentions. May Allah Love me, and bless this work. My message to any non-Muslim reading this is thus:
Please give Islam a chance, research it for yourself and allow Muslims and Muslim sources to be your primary resources you refer to when studying Islam rather than basing your views on agenda-motivated Islamophobic sources.
O Allah, You are Al-Wadud (The Loving)...please O Allah love me and bless all those Muslims and non-Muslims who read this.
Ameen

Some people are just gullible and accept unsubstantiated claims. The claim that an ISIS fighter came back to life, while he was being carried away to be buried, and converted to Christianity is not something I believe.

Don't believe this weird claim.

Here's part of the strange 'report':

An ISIS jihadist has recently converted to Christianity after being left for dead near the Eastern border of Syria where he was finally rescued by Christian missionaries from the region, reports the Aleppo Herald this morning.The man, that has miraculously survived multiple gun shot wounds after an altercation between ISIS and Syrian Army forces, was rescued by members of the Saint Dominican Catholic Presbytery of Ayyash hours after the conflict had erupted.Sharia Law against terrorismChristians having dreams and converting to Islam

From the American Far Right, people have been claiming that I'm a 'stealth jihadist' preaching 'radical jee-had in Tennessee'. They base this on a fabricated and doctored audio clip (and I have clarified time and time again that it is fabricated). Yet, even when presented with clear evidence that it is fabricated, and that all my teachings fly in the face of this claim, the Radical Right insists that I'm practicing 'takiyya' and lying about my faith, and in reality want to impose a global jihad and kill all Christians and Jews (as per their claim).

And from the other side, ISIS and its supporters claim that I have justified American foreign policy, and that I'm a supporter of the US invasions and a 'RAND' scholar (or, to be more colorful and use their language, a 'coconut'). Unlike the first group, my fellow Muslims who accuse me thus actually don't have a shred of real evidence, and ignore my numerous lectures, Facebook statuses, articles, and speeches that I have always given, and continue to give, stating that the root cause of all violence from Muslim groups is the political grievances caused by American foreign policy. I have spoken continuously and vocally against drones, Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, the sanctions against Iraq, the engineering of the coup in Egypt, the tacit support of Bashar al-Assad's civil war, the false invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan..., and the list goes on and on. With this group, I actually find them even more deaf than the first one, as they refuse to clearly listen to hundreds of pieces of evidences, and establish an extremely flimsy case against me by (just like the first group) cutting and pasting bits and pieces from here and there.

I guess getting death threats from the Far Right and from ISIS should be a good sign, as that indicates I'm in the middle, and hopefully those threats will cancel each other out! Ironically, both groups also demonstrate how blinded they are in their own ways, and how hard their hearts have become. Each group CLAIMS to be fighting for 'freedom', but in their hatred, they have resorted to terrorism and threats of violence and bloodshed, thus becoming the exact enemy they claim to be fighting.

In any case, and as always, I place my trust in Allah, the only One worthy of being trusted, for He will take care of me if I am sincere to Him. حسبي الله ونعم الوكيل نعم المولى ونعم النصير

There's clearly some nonsense about on the internet. I had a commenter post a long comment on my YouTube which was talking about Hinduism and the Kaba. Yep, the internet is full of weird conspiracy theories. Here's part of what he wrote:

Some "researcher" known as P. N. Oak has come up with some ludicrous, puerile and absurd comments regarding Islam. His theory postulating the "impact of the Vedic religion on Islam" is laughable. Those acquainted with history will smile at the silliness of the assertions made by Oak.

Among the fallacious claims made by Oak is that The Holy Ka'bah in Makkah was "originally a Shiva temple". But, for this astounding and absurd claim he fails to present any evidence. He permits his imagination to play havoc with him, hence he bases his claim on "a gold dish" supposedly located in the Ka'bah. Oak alleges that some inscription on the gold dish supposedly found in the Holy Ka'bah refers to "Vikram's enlightened rule".

Assuming that such a dish was in fact located in the Holy Ka'bah, how on earth can such a chance finding override and abrogate the volumes of historical facts surrounding the Holy Ka'bah? If a copy of the Holy Qur'aan is found in some Hindu temple or in a Christian shrine or in the Pope's headquarters, does it follow that these places were some Muslim Shrines in some remote point in time and that it will be correct to conclude from such a finding that Islam has made an impact on the respective religions? No person of intelligence can uphold such a ludicrous and unreasonable conclusion. The finding of some dish, parchment, plate, garment or any other object is not an intelligent basis for upturning and negating facts which have been testified for accuracy by authorities, from generation to generation. If every simple find such as a dish, constitutes a valid basis for revising historical facts, then we dare say that the entire history of the world will have to be re-written.

If Oak's "key" to his "research" is a mere dish supposedly located in the Holy Ka'bah, every man of some intelligence can understand the fallacy of his entire research-conclusions. It staggers the imagination to be informed that a man, supposedly a research scholar, is prepared to dismiss the wealth and volume of historical facts on the basis of a dish which has been claimed to have been found in the Ka'bah. If the same or a similar dish singing the praises of Vikram had to be found in Buckingham Palace will it be sensible to aver that this Palace was a Hindu shrine once upon a time?

We have no knowledge of any "golden dish" with Hindu praises having been found in the Holy Ka'bah. Let Mr. Oak furnish factual proof regarding this "dish".

Mr. Oak should also be apprized of some historical facts pertaining to the Ka'bah. Prior to the advent of Prophethood of Muhammad (on whom be peace), the Ka'bah was filled with hundreds of idols -- the gods of the pagans who had abandoned the true religion of their forefather, Nabi lbraaheem (Prophet Abraham) on whom be peace. The pagan Arabs in fact had a god (an idol) for each different day of the year. It will not be at all surprising if Mr. Oak's research could have suggested that the cult of idol worship which existed among pre-Islam Arabs was the impact of the Vedic religion. Since the Hindu or the Vedic religion is an idolatrous cult with a multitude of gods, the idolatry of the pagan Arabs in the pre-Islamic era can understandably and reasonably be attributed to the Vedic religion. The idols of the pagan Arabs and the idols of the Vedic religion are birds of a feather, but, to suggest that the Vedic idolatrous religion had any impact on Islam and its rigidly monotheistic teachings and beliefs is preposterous and absurd in the extreme.

Again assuming that some Hindu golden dish was located in the Holy Ka'bah, common sense would have concluded that the "dish" was a relic of the idolatrous pagans who had filled the Holy Ka'bah with 360 idols. The idolatrous pagans of the pre-Islam era, having imported their cult of idolatry from the Hindu east, had similar rites of idol-worship. Offerings of a variety of kinds were made to propitiate the idols. It will, therefore, not at all be surprising if the supposed golden dish was among the offerings which the pagans had made to the idols which had been installed in the Holy Ka'bah by the pagan Arabs heavily influenced by the idolatry of the east -- the idolatry of the Vedic religion being the most profound.

In terms of the "golden dish " theory as propounded by Oak, Vedic missionaries had arrived in Arabia to preach their religion. This is the claim supposedly made in the inscriptions on the "dish". If this is indeed so, then it accounts for the paganism and the idolatry of the Arabs before the advent of Muhammad (on whom be peace). The Arabs, being the followers of Nabi lbraheem (Prophet Abraham) -- on whom be peace -- were rigidly and uncompromisingly believers in THE ONE GOD. The spread of idolatry among them is therefore surprising. However, the "dish" theory of Oak throws light on the origin of idol-worship among the pre-Islam Arabs. A "golden dish" located in the Ka'bah, with Vedic inscriptions is testimony for the origin of the idols which had once occupied the Holy Ka'bah Mosque in the days before Muhammad (on whom be peace). When the Holy Ka'bah had housed even the idols of the pagan Arabs sedated by Hindu idolatry, then the location of a mere "dish" with Vedic inscriptions should come as no surprise.

Mr. Oak presents a number of fallacious points for his conclusion that theVedic religion had an impact on Islam. The article in the LEADER states:

"In his research Mr. Oak furnishes other proof reinforcing the belief that Arabs were once followers of the Indian Vedic way of life."

That the pre-Islam Arabs were pagans and idolaters is an undeniable and a well-established historical fact which ten-year old kids in a primary school are aware of. If the Arab idolatrous cult was the influence or even the product of "the Indian Vedic way of life", there is nothing surprising about it. But, the cult of the pre-Islam Arabs should not be confused with the uncompromising religion of monotheism of Islam delivered to mankind by Muhammad (on whom be peace). No one will deny the idolatry of the pagan pre-Islam Arabs. If some theory or research establishes that the 360 idols installed by the Arabs in the Ka'bah prior to the advent of Islam were the influence or the impact of the Vedic religion, we shall not contest such a claim since reason can accept that a religion grounded and advanced in idolatry can spawn a cult of lesser idolatry, the lesser idolatry in this instance being the idolatry of the pagan Arabs.

One of his points is the Hajj. In this regard Oak states:

"The annual Hajj of the Muslims to the Ka'bah is of an earlier pre-Islamic congregation."

It is clear that Mr. Oak is a poor student of history. Even our little children are aware of the fact that the Hajj pilgrimage was in existence prior to the appearance of Nabi Muhammad (on whom be peace). The Hajj worship came into existence among the Arabs during the time of Nabi lbraheem (on whom be peace). From this angle it will be correct to conclude that the Hajj of the present-day Muslims "is of an earlier pre-Islamic congregation". By "pre-Islamic" will mean the era prior to the advent of Muhammad (on whom be peace). But, it is ridiculous to infer that the Islamic Hajj is the impact of the Vedic religion merely because it was in existence from the time of Prophet lbraheem. Every practice of the pre-Islam pagan Arabs cannot be attributed to Vedic influence or the influence of some other idolatrous cult. While the actual worship of Hajj among the Arabs came into existence during the time of Nabi lbraheem (on whom be peace), the Arabs who later abandoned the true religion of lbraheem (on whom be peace) introduced many pagan and idolatrous rites into the Hajj pilgrimage presumably under influence of Vedic idolaters who came to Arabia to preach the idolatry of the Vedic religion. But, such idolatrous influences introduced by the pre-Islam pagans cannot be cited as a basis for the preposterous claim that the Hajj itself is a Vedic rite. There is absolutely no factual or historical evidence to substantiate this fallacious claim made by Oak.

Another absurd claim made by Oak is stated in the Leader as follows:

"The principal shrines at Varanasi, in India and at Makkah, in Arrastan, were Shiva temples. Even to this day ancient Mahadeva emblems can be seen."

Such emblems can be seen on the Shiva temples in India. But the allegation of such signs of idolatry -- such emblems of paganism -- on the Ka'bah is a blatent falsity. What is Oak's proof for existence of such emblems in the Ka'bah? Such "emblems of Mahadeva" allegedly in or on the Ka'bah are the reflections of Oak's imagination.

The "dish" theory constrains Oak to conjecture the following conclusion which 'he seems to believe as factual evidence:

"According to the inscriptions, if King Vikram spread the Vedic religion, who else but he could have founded the Ka'bah Temple?"

If King Vikram did in fact spread the Vedic religion of idolatry which gave birth to the 360 idols of the pagan Arabs, it does not follow therefrom that the Holy Ka'bah was a Hindu temple built by Vikram. For such a preposterous claim factual proof is required. The wishful thinking of Mr. Oak cannot override the facts of history. Even the pagan Arabs were fully aware of the origin of the Ka'bah. They had full knowledge of the fact that Nabi lbraheem (on whom be peace) was the founder of the Ka'bah. The groundless suggestion of a man in this belated century is nothing other than pure wishful thinking -- a fallacy to be dismissed with contempt.

In support of his conclusions based on the "dish" theory, Oak claims:

"Pilgrims' shaving of head and beard and donning white cloth are remnants of the old Vedic practice of entering temples clean shaven."

Oak demonstrates his lack of knowledge of Islamic practices by his claim of shaving the beard. Hujjaaj (pilgrims) do not shave their beards. Muslim males are not permitted to shave their beards whether they are at home or entering temples or Mosques, be it the Sacred Mosque of the Ka'bah or any other mosque. While shaving the head for male pilgrims is a rite of the Hajj, shaving the beard is not permissible. It may be a Vedic practice to shave the beard, but definitely not a Muslim practice.

Muslim pilgrims do not shave their heads in order to enter temples or Mosques. If shaving the head is a Vedic practice necessary for entry into a temple, Mr. Oak should learn from us that it is not a practice of Islam. Muslim pilgrims either shave or clip some hairs to release them from the restrictions of the Hajj (pilgrimage).

If donning white cloth was a custom of "old Vedic" religion, it does not logically follow therefrom that the white garments which Muslim pilgrims don are "Remnants of old Vedic practice". What are Oak's grounds for this fictitious theory? It is absurd to suggest that wherever a white religious garb exists it must be the result of Vedic influence.

Among the points put forward by Oak for his fallacy is the emblem of the crescent moon. Stating this point of Oak, the Leader says:

“In India the crescent moon is always painted across the forehead of the Shiva symbol. The same emblem now adorns the flag of Islam."

Mr. Oak has transgressed all bounds of absurdity in putting forward this ignorant claim. What is the "flag of Islam" in Oak's understanding? From where did this 'research scholar' obtain his information in this regard! If the flags of Muslim countries have the symbol of the crescent, it does not follow that the Flag of Muhammad (on whom be peace) -- the Flag of Islam -- also displayed the crescent emblem. The crescent emblem is an innovation which did not exist during the time of the Holy Prophet (on whom be peace) nor during the time of his righteous Khulafa (Representatives and Successors). Assuming that the crescent emblem did exist among the Muslims of the Prophetic era, then too, Oak will have no grounds to bolster his claim of Vedic origin and Vedic influence. One cannot venture such claims without producing facts and proofs to substantiate one's claims which are in conflict with all facts of history.

Endeavoring to present his wishful thinking as a fact of history, Oak asserts that the Tawaaf (circumambulation) of the Ka'bah by pilgrims is the influence of the Vedic religion. Thus, the Leader says:

"Muslim pilgrims go around the Ka'bah seven times, a common practice among Hindus. In no other mosque does circumambulation prevail."

Circumambulation of the Ka'bah is because of the special religious significance which Muslims believe is exclusive to the Ka'bah, the first Place of Worship ever to be constructed on earth. According to Islamic belief, the first person to build the Ka'bah was Aadam (on whom be peace) -- the first man on earth. Its superior rank and the special divine presence which Muslims believe surrounds the Ka'bah are the facts underlying the circumambulation. If Hindus do in fact circumambulate some temple seven times, it cannot be claimed that such a Hindu practice gave rise to the Tawaaf (circumambulation) rite of Islam, Mere similarities between opposite and divergent religions cannot be cited as evidence for one's claims unsupported by factual proof.

Another point of Oak stated by the Leader is:

"Eid in Sanskrit means worship and Bakri Eid, which derives from sacrifices of Vedic times was celebrated with mutton feasting at the time of the sun's entry into Aries."

If the term "Eid" means "worship" in Sanskrit, we have to apprize Oak of the fact that in Arabic the word "Eid" does not mean “worship". In Arabic "Eid" means 'the Day of Return'. The Islamic Festivals are known as such because of their 'return' or 'repeated coming'. The term itself does not connote 'worship' in Arabic. Thus, there is no question of the Arabic term 'Eid' being the Sanskrit term contended by Oak. There is, therefore, absolutely no point for Oak's "dish" theory" in the Arabic word, "Eid". "Bakri Eid" being the occasion when Muslims sacrifice animals unto Allah Ta'ala has no resemblance with any Vedic mutton-feasting practice dedicated to idols. The word "Bakri" is not Arabic. It is an Urdu term meaning 'goat'. Since goats are generally sacrificed in India on the occasion of Eidul Adhaa, Indian Muslims have coined the name "Bakri Eid". The main animal of sacrifice for the Arabs has always been the camel. Eidul Adhaa -- the original and correct name of this auspicious Day -- is the name known to the Arabs. The sacrifice of animals on this occasion is in commemoration of the supreme sacrifice of lbraheem (on whom be peace). There is absolutely no resemblance to any Vedic mutton-eating custom of idolatrous merry-making. If the Vedic custom of mutton-feasting is to mark the sun's entry into 'Aries', the Islamic practice of sacrificing animals is not. Even the Christian Bible speaks of the sacrifice of animals. If the Islamic custom of sacrificing animals has to be the result of Vedict impact, then Oak may also argue that the biblical practice of sacrificing animals is likewise the influence of the Vedic religion.

Oak then claims:

"The Islamic word Eidgah, signifies "House of Worship" which is the exact Sanskrit connotation of the term."

Again Oak exhibits his total ignorance of Islam and its practices. In Arabic there is no such term as "Eidgah". This term was unknown to the Prophet and his followers during the early history of Islam. The term 'gah' means place in the Urdu language. It is not of Arabic origin nor does Eidgah in Urdu mean "House of Worship". The Eidgah is a special venue set aside for solely the prayers which are performed on the Day of Eid. Eidgah, therefore, means in Urdu the place where the special Eid prayers are performed. Since the term is not of Arabic origin nor is it the word used by the Arabs to describe the place where the Eid prayers are conducted, there is no support in it for Oak's conclusions stemming from his "dish" theory. In Arabic the place where the Eid prayers are conducted is known as the "Musallaa".

Oak betrays his ignorance of Islam in similar fashion by tendering the following point in substantiation of the "dish" theory:

"Also, the word Namaaz derives from two Sanskrit roots, 'Nama and yajna' meaning bowing and worshipping."

The word "Namaaz" is not an Arabic term. It was never used by the prophet of Islam nor by the Arab Muslims. Even to this day the Islamic practice of prayers is described as Salaah, not Namaaz. Namaaz is of Persian origin. While Salaah (Islamic prayers) is known as 'Namaaz' in Persian and Urdu, it has never been the case in Arabic. How ridiculous then, is it not, for Oak to cite an Urdu term coined ages after the Prophet of Islam (on whom be peace), to bolster his theory arising out of a dish supposedly found in the Ka'bah? The Urdu language consists of words from many languages, including Sanskrit. But, the Urdu language was not the language of the Prophet or of the Arabs.

It is therefore meaningless to seek to forge a theory concerning the Arabs of the pre-Islam and post-Islam era by tendering terms introduced by non-Arab Muslims centuries after the advent of the Prophet of Islam (on whom be peace).

Presenting another preposterous and fallacious point in substantiation of his "dish" theory, Oak says:

".....that Shabibarat is the corrupt form of Shiva Ratra and that the term 'Eidul Fitr' derives from the Eid of Piters (worship of forefathers in Sanskrit tradition and Pitri Paksha among Hindus)."

The term "shab" is not Arabic. The occasion referred to is the 15th night of the month of Sha'baan in the Islamic calendar. The Arabs do not know this night by the name, 'Shabibarat'. This is an Indian term, also introduced ages after the Holy Prophet (on whom be peace). It is blatantly false to aver that the Urdu or Faarsi word 'shab' is the corrupt form of 'shiva'. Whatever shiva may mean in Sanskrit, it has absolutely no relationship with the Urdu term, 'shab' which means night. The word 'baraa-ah' is not a corrupt form of the Sanskrit term, ratra'- Oak has allowed his imagination to play havoc with him. He makes sweeping claims without furnishing grounds for his fallacies.

His claim regarding "Eidul Fitr" is just as fallacious. Eidul Fitr has absolutely no connection with some idolatrous worship of forefathers. Eidul Fitr is the Day of Happiness marking the end of the month of fasting, viz., the month of Ramadhaan. In Islam there is no ritual or practice which is even remotely akin to the Hindu custom of worshipping forefathers.

Oak claims that the word 'Allah', the Islamic term for God Almighty, is a Sanskrit word meaning 'goddess or mother'. If there is some such word in Sanskrit having these meanings stated by Oak, there is absolutely no proof for the claim that the Arabic word, Allah has been borrowed from Sanskrit. In Arabic, the word 'Allah’ does not mean 'goddess' or 'mother'. The word, 'Allah' has been known to the very first man on earth, viz., Adam (on whom be peace). If some of the progeny of Adam in the different parts of the world retained the term 'Allah' after having abandoned the true religion taught by the Prophets, there is no surprise whatsoever.

It is the belief of Muslims, a belief stated by the Qur’an, that Almighty Allah had sent Prophets to all nations. Prophets of Allah have therefore appeared in India and in all places to deliver the Truth of Islam. It is, therefore, quite possible, in fact, almost certain that the Prophet or Prophets who came to India many thousands of years ago, had come with the word, Allah. The Indians must have been apprized by the Prophets that God Almighty is Allah, The One. Therefore, it is not at all surprising if the term 'Allah' has been retained by the Sanskrit language. But, then why do Hindus not refer to God with the Name Allah if their language and their religion claim that the correct word for God is 'Allah'?

Oak, spurred on by his imagination, is reading too much in word similarities. Word similarities exist in most languages. A word of the same or similar pronunciation may be found with the same or different meanings in different languages. Historical facts of certitude cannot be deduced from such similarities of ambiguity. Such flimsy theories which are the product of mere imagination and wishful thinking cannot constitute facts and grounds for the negation of historical and religious facts supported by the testimony of generations of authorities.

In conclusion we are compelled to observe that the findings of Oak are amazing in absurdity and in their degree of fallacy. [Source]

According to Ibn Sa'd and Ibn Ishâq, Abu 'Afak was a 120 years old Jewish man who had abused the Prophet(P) verbally, so the latter launched a raid under the command of Salîm Ibn 'Umaîr to kill him. We do know that Ibn Ishâq lived in the 2nd half of the 2nd century after Hijra, as well as Al-Waqîdî from whom Ibn Sa'd (died 230 A.H.) copied the story of Abu 'Afak.

As explained above, the chain of reporters of the story from eye-witnesses of the event till Ibn Ishâq or Al-Waqîdî must be examined and verified. So, our legitimate question is: where is the isnâd (i.e., chain of reporters)?

Unfortunately, references of the Sîrah do not provide such information. Actually, we are told that this story has no isnâd at all; neither Ibn Ishâq (or his disciple Ibn Hîsham) nor Al-Waqîdî (or his disciple Ibn Sa'd) had provided such a thing! In this case, the story is rated by hadîth scholars as "...of no basis", indicating that it has reached the lowest degree of criticism regarding its isnâd. This is in fact a proper scientific position because we cannot accept such a problematic story without evidence.

In brief, we have no commitment to accept such a baseless story - according to scientific criteria of hadîth criticism - which strangely had appeared in the 2nd half of the 2nd century after Hijra. We are therefore obliged to reject the story of the killing of Abu 'Afak by Salîm Ibn 'Umaîr at the Prophet’s command. Hesham AzmyRelated:Assassination of Ka' ibn al AshrafAsma Bint Marwan killing forgery?Abu Bakr's advice:"I advise you ten things| Do not kill women or children or an aged, infirm person. Do not cut down fruit-bearing trees. Do not destroy an inhabited place. Do not slaughter sheep or camels except for food. Do not burn bees and do not scatter them. Do not steal from the booty, and do not be cowardly."

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim.

Friday, 27 February 2015

People can be transformed. The opponents of the Prophet (p) were particularly vicious against Muslims. Hind actually bit into the liver of the Prophet's uncle, Hamzah, when he was martyred at the Battle of Uhud. However, she later became a Muslim, and hence became a Companion of the Prophet (p), a member of that special generation of humanity. In fact, she even narrated hadith which can be found in the well-known compilations. Repentance is a recourse that the Lord of the World's has given humanity. [p129, Purification of the Heart by Hamza Yusuf]

Noam Chomsky calls it how it is. The message from Noam Chomsky to Barack Obama is clear: stop your own terrorism (i.e. bombing other people) and the Muslim terrorist groups will stop their terrorism and pay some attention to the grievances of the people who are sympathising and supporting the terrorists.

Thursday, 26 February 2015

This is a message to Mohammad Emwazi (Jihadi John) and all supporters of ISIS. Please rethink your allegiance to ISIS and leave ISIS. ISIS is a misguided group which is an oppressive force committing crimes against innocent human beings. These things are not allowed in Islam.

The Islamic Caliphate of ISIS claims to stand up in the face of oppression and defend the Muslims & the values of Islam, yet the recent beheadings and attacks on innocent civilians show that the actions of ISIS contradict the most basic notions of sacred value for innocent life that Islam teaches.

British and American Muslims have been working hard in peacefully speaking out against ISIS.

Austria has introduced new laws which prevent Muslims from receiving foreign funding for mosques and imams. This is utter discrimination. Austrian Jews and Christians are not subjected to these laws with regards to synagogues and churches.

Here is an important message for any Austrian who has negative feelings for Muslims and Islam:

People can be transformed. The opponents of the Prophet (p) were particularly vicious against Muslims. Hind actually bit into the liver of the Prophet's uncle, Hamzah, when he was martyred at the Battle of Uhud. However, she later became a Muslim, and hence became a Companion of the Prophet (p), a member of that special generation of humanity. In fact, she even narrated hadith which can be found in the well-known compilations. Repentance is a recourse that the Lord of the World's has given humanity. [p129, Purification of the Heart by Hamza Yusuf]

The Austrian parliament has passed controversial reforms to the country's century-old law on Islam.
The bill, which is partly aimed at tackling Islamist radicalism, gives Muslims more legal security but bans foreign funding for mosques and imams.
Austria's Integration Minister, Sebastian Kurz, defended the reforms but Muslim leaders say they fail to treat them equally
[BBC News]

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Email:yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Don't be fooled by a person who is claiming to be an ex imam who became a Christian (Catholic), Mario Joseph. The claims of Mario Joseph being an ex Muslim imam are looked into by Gabriel al Romaani. Mario Joseph makes errors when talking about the Quran. This throws his claim of being an ex imam into great doubt. These errors are looked into by Gabriel al Romaani.

Another point I want to add, in the 'Changing Tracks' video, they show a picture of Mario Joseph when he was supposedly an imam...he is clean shaven. Now, that for an imam is really, really unusual. I don't think I have ever seen an imam of a mosque who is clean shaven (i.e no beard). In India this must be extremely odd. Odd.

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Email:yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Sam Shamoun and David Wood are desperate to use anything to attack Islam. Even forgeries. Seen as Shamoun has been in the business of attacking Islam longer than David Wood, I'd suspect Shamoun may well have already come across a response telling him that the story of killing the poetess is actually a forgery. As for David Wood, I'm not sure. Either way, they are ignorant at the very least.

The Killing of Asma': True Story or Forgery?Basically thechargeis that the Prophet(P)had ordered the killing of Asma' when she insulted him with her poetry. As it is usually the case where the history of Islam and the character of the Prophet(P)is concerned, it is left to the Muslims to throw some light on authenticity of the story in which this incident is reported by the sources and educate the missionaries in matters which they have no clue about.The story of the killing of Asma' bint Marwan is mentioned by Ibn Sa'd inKitab At-Tabaqat Al-Kabir[3]and by the author ofKinz-ul-'Ummalunder number 44131 who attributes it to Ibn Sa'd, Ibn 'Adiyy and Ibn 'Asaker. What is interesting is that Ibn 'Adiyy mentions it in his bookAl-Kamelon the authority of Ja'far Ibn Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ibn As-Sabah on authority of Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim Ash-Shami on authority ofMuhammad Ibn Al-Hajjaj Al-Lakhmion authority of Mujalid on authority of Ash-Shu'abi on authority of Ibn 'Abbas, and added that...this isnâd (chain of reporters) is not narrated on authority of Mujalid but by Muhammad Ibn Al-Hajjaj and they all (other reporters in the chain)accuse Muhammad Ibn Al-Hajjaj of forging it.[4]It is also reported by Ibn al-Gawzi inAl-'Ilal[5]and is listed among other flawed reports.So according to its isnâd,the report is forged- because one of its reporters is notorious for fabricating hadîth. Hence, such a story is rejected and is better off being put into the trash can.

And we see in genuine reports, Prophet Muhammad forbade the killing of women:

Saheeh MuslimBook 019, Hadith Number 4319. Chapter : Prohibition of killing women and children in war. It is narrated on the authority of 'Abdullah that a woman was found killed in one of the battles fought by the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him). He disapproved of the killing of women and children.Maliks MuwattaBook 021, Hadith Number 008. Section : Prohibition against Killing Women and Children in Military Expeditions.

Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab that a son of Kab ibn Malik (Malik believed that ibn Shihab said it was Abd ar-Rahman ibn Kab) said, "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade those who fought ibn Abi Huqayq (a treacherous jew from Madina) to kill women and children. He said that one of the men fighting had said, 'The wife of ibn Abi Huqayq began screaming and I repeatedly raised my sword against her. Then I would remember the prohibition of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, so I would stop. Had it not been for that, we would have been rid of her.'"Taken from here

More information of the false story of the killing of the poetess Asma Bint Marwan see:

Forgery: Asma was a poetess who belonged to a tribe of Medinan pagans, and whose husband was named Yazid b. Zayd. She composed a poem blaming the Medinan pagans for obeying a stranger (Muhammad) and for not taking the initiative to attack him by surprise. When the Allah-inspired prophet heard what she had said, he asked, "Who will rid me of Marwan’s daughter?" A member of her husband’s tribe volunteered and crept into her house that night. She had five children, and the youngest was sleeping at her breast. The assassin gently removed the child, drew his sword, and plunged it into her, killing her in her sleep.

The following morning, the assassin defied anyone to take revenge. No one took him up on his challenge, not even her husband. In fact, Islam became powerful among his tribe. Previously, some members who had kept their conversion secret now became Muslims openly, "because they saw the power of Islam," conjectures Ibn Ishaq.

Wednesday, 25 February 2015

This further highlights the problem of Islamophobia in Britain. When nearly 20% of British Muslim females are feeling unsafe in their own country one needs to ask why? Not to mention that 10% of British Muslim men are feeling unsafe in their own country. What's going on in Britain? Is the British media fuelling Islamophobia?

The battle against Islamophobia is a long and hard battle. But it's the right battle. Keep getting the word out. Let's fight Islamophobia together!

Nearly 20% of Muslim women questioned said they felt unsafe in Britain, compared with 10% of men. [BBC]

“There is no such concept in Islam that is called “honor killing”. Islam holds every soul in high esteem and does not allow any transgression upon it. It does not allow people to take the law in their own hands and administer justice, because doing so will be leading to chaos and lawlessness. Therefore, based on this, Islam does not permit such killings.”Bilal Phillips and Hamza Yusuf on Honour killings:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVE-_7WB_SE

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother/sister of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim.

Ergun Caner has been disgraced but what about Walid Shoebat? This guy has a number of question marks after his name. He claims to have bombed a bank, yet the bank has no record of this attack according to The Jerusalem Post.

Tuesday, 24 February 2015

Dr Yasir Qadhi highlights another outright lie. There was a claim that Prophet Muhammad p died in the year 666CE. Of course this is a lie. It's clear that this lie was motivated by folk who wanted to associate Prophet Muhammad with the mark of the beast.
Peter the Venerable was amongst those who spread this lie.
Who Spread the Lie that Prophet Muhammad Died in 666 CE?

This is another lie about the Prophet Muhammad p which Dr Yasir Qadhi highlights. Christians distorted his name and called him 'Mahound' and 'Mahoun'. They did this because the 'Mahound' is a name of a devil in Chistian theology.

This is one of those claims that's out on the internet: 'Prophet Muhammad and his men robbed caravans'. Dr Yasir Qadhi breaks it down in this short clip. It's really a twisting of the facts. Prophet Muhammad p and his men did not attack caravans unconditionally. They were at war with the Quraish. The Quraish had oppressed them, forced them out of their land and took their property and wealth. Thus, the only caravans which were attacked were those of the Quraish.

It was indeed the pagans who began the hostilities by persecuting and beating the Muslims, on top of this the pagans even boycotted the Muslims which almost led to starvation! The Muslims as a result were forced to leave Makkah because of the Pagan violence and hatred, leaving all their property and business behind in the hands of the violent Pagans who would not compensate or anything. Hence the prophet Muhammad had every right to raid their caravans and take their property and income as the pagans had first done this to the Muslims [Sami Zaatari] http://muslim-responses.com/Who_Antagonized_Whom/Who_Antagonized_Whom_